Is history accurate or inaccurate because of different historical giants? Morgan's central idea is that because a higher or bigger historian or literary figures says something different or something is wrong that they can change the history into how they think is was or should be. To put it differently, history is made and not changed upon the idea of a higher person who thinks they know what they are talking about. He gives examples of what other people think history should be like then claims of what it should actually be like according to him, for this reason his central idea is wrong. Robert Morgan claims are “Average citizens were responsible for westward expansion” and “history is not made up by just a few heroes and villains.” In Robert
…show more content…
For example: “The poet Walt Whitman believed that written accounts always miss the reality, the specifics and multiplicity of history.” One thing to consider is, if accounts miss the reality and specifics of history than how are the specifics and reality known today. Where did these higher historical giants get the information of reality and specifics if it was not known during the westward expansion? On the very first page of Thomas Jefferson’s America, Ambrose states “The potential of the United States was, if not limitless, certainly vast and vastly greater than if the nation could add the trans-Mississippi portion.” This meaning the United States was growing and growing, so what is it to the higher people to think the specifics were missed?
(Ambrose 51)
Morgan’s claim of “No true history of the Westward expansion” and “Westward expansion will not be accurate due to accounts of historical giants” is something that would have to be decided when westward expansion happened. Now that the people who experienced the actualy expansion are not here to tell what exactly was missed, than there is not much for these historical giants to go off of. Coming back to Robert Morgan’s biography it says “we cannot deny the fact of the westward expansion” meaning it happened and it is over. So now it can’t be
For example: “The poet Walt Whitman believed that written accounts always miss the reality, the specifics and multiplicity of history.” One thing to consider is, if accounts miss the reality and specifics of history than how are the specifics and reality known today. Where did these higher historical giants get the information of reality and specifics if it was not known during the westward expansion? On the very first page of Thomas Jefferson’s America, Ambrose states “The potential of the United States was, if not limitless, certainly vast and vastly greater than if the nation could add the trans-Mississippi portion.” This meaning the United States was growing and growing, so what is it to the higher people to think the specifics were missed?
(Ambrose 51)
Morgan’s claim of “No true history of the Westward expansion” and “Westward expansion will not be accurate due to accounts of historical giants” is something that would have to be decided when westward expansion happened. Now that the people who experienced the actualy expansion are not here to tell what exactly was missed, than there is not much for these historical giants to go off of. Coming back to Robert Morgan’s biography it says “we cannot deny the fact of the westward expansion” meaning it happened and it is over. So now it can’t be